Fertilizers play a crucial role in enhancing the productivity of plants. However, low nutrient use efficiencies of conventional fertilizers (CFs) associated with several losses have led to widespread multi-nutrient deficiencies in the soil and lower productivity.
Dear Researcher,
Kindly share valuable knowledge on Nano-fertilizers and Neem-coated urea in the field of Agriculture.
What is the difference between the Mechanism of nutrient uptake through plants?
What is the role/ effect of the surface area of Nano-fertilizers and Neem-coated urea during the uptake process?
Thanking you.
Jogendra Singh
Nano-fertilizers and Neem-coated urea are modern advancements in farming. Nano-fertilizers are tiny particles that deliver nutrients directly to plants, helping them grow better. Neem-coated urea is urea coated with neem oil, which slows down its release, making nutrients available to plants over a longer time.
The difference in how plants take up nutrients lies in their mechanisms: Nano-fertilizers are so small that plants can absorb them more easily through their roots, while Neem-coated urea gradually breaks down, allowing plants to absorb nutrients as needed.
Surface area is crucial because Nano-fertilizers have a large surface area per particle, enhancing nutrient release and uptake efficiency. Neem-coated urea's surface area affects how fast it breaks down, influencing nutrient availability. These innovations help farmers increase crop yield while using fertilizers more efficiently and sustainably.
There is often a tendency with fertilisers and the psychological mentality of cropping production to "stay with what works". Unfortunately, in land management, when looking at a holistic picture, Land, nutrient, invasive plants animals and diseases, cropping choices, seasonal variations, water, and the hundreds of other considerations, fertiliser is one of the easy choices.
Generally, it runs to "this has been working for me for the last 10 years so why change it. The problem there is that the flush of success leads to an apathy in understanding the soil, and in some cases, over cropping, redundant crop types, and unvaried practices lead to a misconception of good practice, when the reality may be that the soil (the base medium) after time has degraded to the point that it is just a binding and holding agent for fertiliser and not actually enriching itself for long term stability.
This is the same issue with chemical herbicides, and pesticides and the fundamental practice of putting something on the ground to make it better for something else is the same in principle. It is just not something you think about too often with a hundred other farm considerations, cost etc, looking out across a field of grain at harvest time.
There is a wealth of information and study on this matter, however there is a drought of practical information and education to the landholder to foment practice change from what is working, usually until it is to late.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Geoscience
- Atmospheric Sciences
- Atmosphere
- Air